BrexitCentralhttps://brexitcentral.com
Bringing you news and analysis of the UK's departure from the EU and promoting a positive and optimistic vision of Britain after BrexitThu, 21 Mar 2019 14:29:56 +0000en-GBhourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.10https://brexitcentral.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/favicon.pngBrexitCentralhttps://brexitcentral.com
3232Now is the moment for Brexiteers in Parliament to stay true and be bravehttps://brexitcentral.com/now-moment-brexiteers-parliament-stay-true-brave/
Wed, 20 Mar 2019 22:30:28 +0000http://brexitcentral.com/?p=11179John Bercow certainly knows how to hog the limelight. The man who drones on and on, lecturing MPs about brevity, was at his grandstanding best in the House of Commons on Monday. But for once, I agree with him. It is wrong for the Government to keep asking MPs the same question in the hope […]

]]>John Bercow certainly knows how to hog the limelight. The man who drones on and on, lecturing MPs about brevity, was at his grandstanding best in the House of Commons on Monday. But for once, I agree with him. It is wrong for the Government to keep asking MPs the same question in the hope that enough of them will cave in under pressure. Just because the EU deploys the same tactic to deal with recalcitrant voters who have the audacity to vote “the wrong way”, it doesn’t mean that the Prime Minister should be allowed to get away with it.

Thankfully, Bercow’s intervention has spared us all another meaningful vote this week, and although I am sure it was not the Speaker’s intention to help Brexiteers in Parliament in any way, it might just work in our favour.

I have to say that I am disappointed with some of my fellow Brexiteers – many of them personal friends – who have decided to back Theresa May’s deal at this stage in the negotiations. They have their reasons, and I don’t doubt their commitment to the cause. No-one can say that Philip Davies is anything but a committed Brexiteer, and if anyone starts questioning that commitment, I will defend him. No, the reason why I am disappointed is because I feel that their tactics are wrong.

Theresa May has written her letter and is today going cap in hand to Brussels asking for an extension to Article 50 at the European Council meeting. Britain is in crisis, so she says – said as if she is an innocent bystander, not a protagonist of a deal that has been overwhelmingly rejected by MPs and is deeply unpopular with the majority of UK voters.

If she has any sense, she will say that the Speaker of the House of Commons has tied her hands; that she doesn’t stand a chance of getting the current deal through Parliament because he won’t allow her to. “If you want us to leave more or less on time (after a short technical extension), you had better give me something meaningful, otherwise there won’t be another meaningful vote”, she should say. She could use it as negotiating leverage.

The EU doesn’t want a no-deal Brexit which – despite how MPs voted last week – is still the legal default position in just eight days’ time. It doesn’t want a long extension to Article 50 either. It has offered us a truly awful deal that it wants MPs to approve. The EU has to contend with elections this year which are bound to increase the number of eurosceptic populist MEPs. It doesn’t want more of them from the UK. A new Commission has to bed in and doesn’t want to have to continue Withdrawal Agreement negotiations with the UK. It is far better to give some more concessions that will command majority support in the House of Commons (knowing that it still has by far the best part of the deal) than to allow negotiations to keep dragging on.

So please, Brexiteers in Parliament, stay true and be brave. I know that you are facing pressure left, right and centre. The whips are on your back; retired politicians are busy writing op-eds telling you to cave in; newspaper editorials are urging the same; and one of your number, Andrew Percy, the co-chairman of the misnomer that is the Brexit Delivery Group, has accused you of idiocy for holding out. Don’t listen to them. You know that this deal is awful. You know that it is the worst kind of Brexit in name only. Like me, you are probably resigned to not getting the Brexit that you want. You know that you will have to compromise, but you shouldn’t compromise until the second you have to.

MPs will vote again on Theresa May’s deal next week after the EU has made some tweaks, despite what Bercow said on Monday. The Government will get around it with another one or two pieces of paper from the EU. If it is still a bad deal, they should vote it down. Watch the EU stop the clock on 29th March if it has to, and watch them make more concessions. Please remember that the EU has invested an enormous amount of time and effort into these negotiations, too. Theresa May doesn’t want to throw away more than two years of work, but neither does Michel Barnier.

It has to be made clear that the implementation period must be time limited and there must be alternative arrangements to the Irish backstop for the deal to go through. It still won’t be my kind of Brexit, and it still may be a poor deal, but it will be much better than it is now. Importantly, we won’t be trapped.

Now is not the time to give in. There may be just eight days to go, but these negotiations are far from over. Now is the time to fight harder than ever before.

]]>Business wants certainty – even a three-month Brexit delay prolongs the agony of indecisionhttps://brexitcentral.com/business-wants-certainty-even-three-month-brexit-delay-prolongs-agony-indecision/
Wed, 20 Mar 2019 22:15:59 +0000http://brexitcentral.com/?p=11182Talk to anyone in business, Leaver or Remainer, and they will say that they want the Government to get on with it. In fact, that’s true of anyone you speak to, in business or not. Just get on with it. That’s what the Prime Minister used to say. At the National Conservative Convention in Oxford […]

]]>Talk to anyone in business, Leaver or Remainer, and they will say that they want the Government to get on with it.

In fact, that’s true of anyone you speak to, in business or not. Just get on with it.

That’s what the Prime Minister used to say. At the National Conservative Convention in Oxford at the end of February, she made much of the feeling in the country by telling the assembled throng that the thing that most people say is “Just get on with it. She got a big cheer and a standing ovation.

And last night, she said it again. “The public want us to just get on with it”. Having earlier that day asked for an extension and decided not to get on with it. Obviously.

Business is buoyant (despite Brexit, of course). But at the MIPIM property conference in Cannes last week, where thousands of the property industry gather, the mood was optimistic yet sombre. Optimistic – because business would know where they would be by the end of month; but sombre – because the past two months have been slow as people have put off decisions until the end of March.

The rational question has been: “Why invest now if in a month’s time everything changes? What happens if the pound falls, or rises – I would look pretty silly, and I could lose my job.”

Whilst we remain in the epicentre of uncertainty, why would corporates make any investment decision at the moment?

So for business, they either want a long Article 50 extension, which means they can get on with the job of earning money (although obviously a long extension or no Brexit would be catastrophic for the Tory Party); or to leave, so they can get on with the job of earning money.

What the Prime Minister wants now, an extension until the end of June, is the worst of all worlds as it just prolongs the agony of indecision.

Business is ready to leave on 29th March 2019. Talk to people in the pharmaceuticals industry, and they will tell you that there has been so much information that any business in that industry cannot have failed to prepare. And we all know that Matt Hancock has been the largest buyer of fridges.

Talk to people in the banks and the City. They’ve been preparing for over a year now and they will be ready.

Talk to people in small business. They will tell you that MTD (Making Tax Digital) is far more onerous than Brexit.

And the smart ones in the service industry, from corporate lawyers to PR companies, should be cracking open the Champagne, with their training seminars on how to make your business WTO compliant.

Business has seen the tariff schedules. They’ve made the investment. They’ve put in the hours.

Now please, Prime Minister. Please leave, as you said you would 108 times, on 29th March 2019.

]]>Leo Varadkar’s meddling and antagonism is hindering Anglo-Irish relationshttps://brexitcentral.com/leo-varadkars-meddling-antagonism-hindering-anglo-irish-relations/
Wed, 20 Mar 2019 22:00:47 +0000http://brexitcentral.com/?p=11185“It’s time now to cut them some slack, to cut the British government some slack, when it comes to their request for an extension and when it comes to their request that the Strasbourg Agreement be ratified formally by the European Council over the next two days.” When Leo Varadkar took it upon himself to […]

]]>“It’s time now to cut them some slack, to cut the British government some slack, when it comes to their request for an extension and when it comes to their request that the Strasbourg Agreement be ratified formally by the European Council over the next two days.”

When Leo Varadkar took it upon himself to make the above announcement yesterday, I was met with the familiar feeling of déjà vu. I was immediately reminded of the Taoiseach’s antagonism over the Northern Irish border in January. Not much has changed in his attitude since then, only this time he undercut Mrs. May’s integrity by announcing she would be addressing the British public last night.

This meddling, coupled with the antagonistic “cut them some slack”, is counter-intuitive for any progress on an acceptable Withdrawal Agreement and it is a disservice to many Irish people too.

Sadly, it has now become regular practice for Mr Varadkar to use media engagements to slight Theresa May and her Government’s approach to Brexit. It’s hard to determine what is the purpose of these slights. Personally, I feel he is opportunistically capitalising on public dissatisfaction with Theresa May to boost his own image.

A bit like Jeremy Corbyn, Mr. Varadkar is quick with a quip but slow on any real solutions. All he managed to achieve yesterday was to enrage both sides of the Brexit debate. With his underhand remarks and his big reveal that Mrs. May would be addressing the people, he was insulting the British people.

But why should this matter to the Irish public? Well, our relationship with the UK is unique, a troubled history exists but this doesn’t define our future? For the sake of the Irish in Britain and the British in Ireland it’s time our Taoiseach shows some respect to all involved in this Anglo-Irish relationship.

If anything, Varadkar’s behaviour yesterday will serve only one purpose, to kick our neighbours while they are down. Rather than coming across as suave and debonair, he is in fact damaging the future of Irish citizens, his citizens. Currently it is estimated that roughly 400,000 Irish-born citizens call Britain their home. Furthermore, almost 10% of British citizens can claim some sort of Irish heritage.

Coupled with strong trade relations – Britain accounts for 24% of food, fuel and other merchandise brought into the state according to the Irish Central Statistics Office – this should be ample evidence for co-operation. Alas not in the eyes of Leo Varadkar. As former Taoiseach Garret FitzGerald said in 1983, Britain is “our nearest neighbour and our natural friend”.

Finally, it is interesting to note how the beleaguered Mrs. May alluded to social issues, education and knife crime as she spoke to the public last night. She acknowledged their frustration and though her croaky considerations may be too little too late, at least she acknowledged her citizens.

The Taoiseach seems to have forgotten who has elected him, or is this ignorance by choice? Perhaps he has spent too long with Donald Tusk and is of the opinion that he too cannot be replaced by the public. However, the homelessness epidemic and the housing crisis in Ireland are nearing cataclysmic levels. So I would say to my Taoiseach, remember your citizens here and abroad and do your duty for them.

]]>Theresa May’s full letter to President Tusk on extending Article 50 until June 30thhttps://brexitcentral.com/theresa-mays-full-letter-president-tusk-extending-article-50-june-30th/
Wed, 20 Mar 2019 12:13:35 +0000http://brexitcentral.com/?p=11173The Prime Minister’s letter to President Tusk on the UK’s exit from the European Union & extending Article 50

]]>Paying £39 billion without agreeing future trading arrangements doesn’t even count as a deal in my bookhttps://brexitcentral.com/paying-39-billion-without-agreeing-future-trading-arrangements-doesnt-even-count-deal-book/
Tue, 19 Mar 2019 23:30:13 +0000http://brexitcentral.com/?p=11035As we draw closer to the next Meaningful Vote (despite Bercow), I can only imagine the pressure the ERG and DUP MPs are under. Cast as hard Brexiteers, extremists and fantasists by their peers and mainstream media, I can see why some have started to crack. I have immense admiration and respect for these individuals […]

]]>As we draw closer to the next Meaningful Vote (despite Bercow), I can only imagine the pressure the ERG and DUP MPs are under.

Cast as hard Brexiteers, extremists and fantasists by their peers and mainstream media, I can see why some have started to crack.

I have immense admiration and respect for these individuals and for others outside of these groupings who have stood up to those who wish to deceive the British people and betray the largest ever democratic decision this country has made. They are the people who have put country before party politics.

These individuals have shown leadership, courage, integrity and determination and they should be applauded regardless of their political associations by all of us. Thank you.

Notwithstanding the above, the biggest decision since the 1930s now rests with our elected Members of Parliament: to vote for or against the Government’s deal with the EU.

I ask only this of our MPs whose salaries we all pay: that they vote down this terrible deal not just the next time it is put before them, but for evermore; it is not Brexit.

What is the Government’s deal? It is a misnomer. To all intents and purposes, it is actually the only ‘no deal’ on offer. Why? It would see us pay £39 billion for no trading arrangements, which would have to be negotiated after we have given away our leverage.

It is what the Remain-supporting politicians have been angling for, while deceiving the British people by labelling it as a ‘deal’ that satisfies the referendum result.

It does no such thing and anyone can see that the tortuous negotiations that will follow will result in the Remain establishment saying “we told you it was a bad idea to leave”.

And guess what would happen as we drew closer to the expiry of the so-called implementation period? The EU and referendum deniers will draw us back in and we would be forced onto our knees with cap in hand to accept whatever we are offered.

I hear some say ‘nonsense’ – but just look at what has happened when the public has ever disagreed with the EU before. Democracy as we know it is lost in the sphere of the EU. They believe the people should never be asked for their opinion as their answer will go against the EU’s ideology.

To Leave without a deal is the only realistic option. This has always been the case and it was what we voted for. Yes, we were told a deal would be easy and we thought so too. It should and would have been, had we started from the basis of a clean Brexit, i.e. working toward WTO terms and preparing for it.

So what is the so-called no-deal outcome? In effect, it is a deal: the complete opposite of the Government’s deal. Already lots of side deals are being made in preparation for our departure and terms for trade would be upon the basis of the WTO which is how most world trade is done. Most importantly, it is what we voted for.

This is Brexit, and this is how we will secure a trade deal with the EU that favours both parties. It is and remains the only feasible way we were ever going to get one.

It is highly unlikely that Theresa May will gain any concessions from Brussels over the backstop; and even if she does, her deal will still be Brexit in name only and leave us at the mercy of Brussels in future negotiations over trade.

Courage, determination, integrity and leadership is what we, the people, need more than anything now from our elected Members of Parliament. Even if we are thrown into a delay, which will deflate all of us, these essential virtues that could be lost in a sea of despair at the end of our democracy.

]]>I wobbled and considered backing the deal, but realised I was wronghttps://brexitcentral.com/i-wobbled-considered-backing-deal-realised-i-wrong/
Tue, 19 Mar 2019 23:00:52 +0000http://brexitcentral.com/?p=11066After the various votes of last week I felt that following the removal of the UK’s last little bit of leverage through the removal of “No Deal” from the negotiating table, the only option was for Brexiteers to vote through the flawed Withdrawal Agreement. I have great respect for Michael Howard and other prominent Brexiteers […]

]]>After the various votes of last week I felt that following the removal of the UK’s last little bit of leverage through the removal of “No Deal” from the negotiating table, the only option was for Brexiteers to vote through the flawed Withdrawal Agreement. I have great respect for Michael Howard and other prominent Brexiteers advocating that eurosceptic MPs hold their noses and vote through the deal. I was in agreement with them at the end of last week, but over the weekend realised that I had been sucked too far into the No Brexit vortex.

My reasoning for suggesting they vote for the proposed Withdrawal Agreement was that although the deal is awful, it does mean that we are at least out of the EU and we should at least bank that small gain. However, under the terms of the proposed Withdrawal Agreement, for the transition period, we won’t be out at all but instead virtually a full member but without any form of representation in the European Parliament or Commission. This is a worse situation than being a full voting member!

The second point that struck me is that we are all appalled by the Prime Minister’s inability to negotiate a good deal for Britain. It is therefore essential that she is not involved in the next phase and that we have someone of higher calibre in charge. However, if her Withdrawal Agreement is voted through then we are effectively handing her the keys for the next phase which would pile disaster on disaster.

The third point was this: why should we be afraid of an extension until December 2020 as suggested by some in the EU? The transition period was due to run until then and as explained above this would have been without representation at any level. If it comes to it, we should take up this offer and use the time to renegotiate the Withdrawal Agreement under a new leader now fully aware of how the EU operates and then leave properly at the end of the extension. In the meantime we would have European Parliament elections which I would expect to reinforce and reinvigorate the 2016 referendum vote.

Despite exporting a large percentage of our products to the EU, my preference still remains going WTO on 29th March as that gives us a clean Brexit now and we are then able to move on quicker. My second preference, which is about as likely as hell freezing over, is a short delay of weeks to dot the Is and cross the Ts of a WTO/No Deal exit. My third preference is remaining in the EU under an Article 50 extension until December 2020 and in that time negotiating a new Withdrawal Agreement whilst being fully prepared to walk away and leave without a deal.

Ironically it is by calling the Prime Minister’s bluff and seeing the threat of an Article 50 extension as an opportunity that can put the UK in a much stronger position long term. It is essential that the negotiating balance is reset and these, at this time, are the only ways of doing that.

]]>The case for a World Trade Brexit on 29th March is now stronger than everhttps://brexitcentral.com/case-world-trade-brexit-29th-march-now-stronger-ever/
Mon, 18 Mar 2019 22:50:29 +0000http://brexitcentral.com/?p=11038The Prime Minister claims it is the ‘patriotic’ duty of MPs to vote for her non-Brexit deal. Nothing could be further from the truth. New ComRes polling commissioned by Leave Means Leave shows that by far the public think a WTO Brexit, not the Prime Minister’s deal, honours the 2016 referendum. Just 14% of the public […]

]]>The Prime Minister claims it is the ‘patriotic’ duty of MPs to vote for her non-Brexit deal. Nothing could be further from the truth.

New ComRes polling commissioned by Leave Means Leave shows that by far the public think a WTO Brexit, not the Prime Minister’s deal, honours the 2016 referendum. Just 14% of the public think May’s deal delivers Brexit, compared to 54% of voters who think it doesn’t (including 62% of Leave voters).

MPs are elected to carry out the will of the people – that is the most patriotic duty our parliamentarians hold.

Theresa May’s own 2017 manifesto said “No Deal is better than a bad deal”, and by now it is clear not only in MPs’ eyes but in the British public’s eyes that this is a bad deal. A senior No. 10 source dismissed this mantra when I put it to them last week, but if Downing Street were serious about delivering Brexit they would take Britain out of the EU on 29th March on WTO rules.

Our polling clearly shows that Conservative voters also back No Deal, with 66% saying they agreed with the statement ‘In order to get the best deal with the EU, ‘no-deal’ must be put back on the negotiation table’.

The most shocking figure from our polling is that 56% of Conservative voters agree with the statement ‘The Government seems to be in favour of remaining in the EU and has set out to thwart Brexit from the beginning’.

Any future Conservative leader may want think about this very carefully.

The truth is that those 56% of Tory voters have a point. The Government’s constant backtracking and blurring of red lines has created an atmosphere where trust has broken down.

That’s a major reason why the Prime Minister will struggle to get her deal through, because by trying to play off each side she has destroyed her own credibility. This is getting through to the public too.

When asked whether they agree with the statement ‘MPs voting to delay Brexit has pushed my faith in politicians to an all time low’, 54% of the public said yes, whereas just 24% disagreed.

This lack of trust in our political leaders, and our supposed representatives in Parliament, drips poison into the public psyche. The mood among Brexiteers since 2016 has been spiralling downwards as the Prime Minister continues to humiliate herself and her country on the world stage.

But it’s not just Theresa May causing the public to lose faith, it is the anti-democratic MPs who are using every trick in the book to frustrate Brexit. 2016 was the first time the people won against the establishment, and now after years of infighting and manoeuvring the elites are beginning to hold the upper hand. Whether that’s John Bercow giving direct advice to Remain-backing politicians on how to take over control of Parliament or Tony Blair advising the EU to frustrate Brexit, the Westminster elite are in full force in trying to betray Brexit.

The only way out of this is to leave on 29th March.

John Bercow blocking another meaningful vote means it is now Theresa May’s duty to go for a World Trade Brexit, which is the most popular option for Brexit voters and Conservatives.

It is time for Theresa May to fulfill her patriotic and solemn duty to take Britain out of the EU on 29th March – otherwise public trust in her party and the political system will continue to collapse.

ComRes surveyed 2,033 British adults online between 15th and 17th March 2019. Data were weighted to be demographically representative of all GB adults. Voting intention questions were also weighted by past vote recall and likelihood to vote and all other questions also weighted by 2016 EU Referendum results.

]]>Eurosceptic MPs must hold the line and reject further attempts to hold Brexit to ransomhttps://brexitcentral.com/eurosceptic-mps-must-hold-line-reject-attempts-hold-brexit-ransom/
Mon, 18 Mar 2019 22:45:25 +0000http://brexitcentral.com/?p=11036I am going to be doing what some might describe as a monumentally stupid thing on 2nd May. I will be standing as a council candidate for the Conservatives in my local area. Given the palpable fury in the country at the two main parties’ handling of Brexit, one can only imagine that doorstep conversations are going […]

]]>I am going to be doing what some might describe as a monumentally stupid thing on 2nd May. I will be standing as a council candidate for the Conservatives in my local area.

Given the palpable fury in the country at the two main parties’ handling of Brexit, one can only imagine that doorstep conversations are going to be very interesting. I am fortunate in that my local electorate has its head firmly screwed on, and is quite capable of differentiating between local issues and national politics. Nonetheless, this election remains the first available chance that voters have to ‘punish’ both Labour and the Conservatives for the way that both have approached the most seismic change in our political landscape for many decades.

Arguably, it is the Conservatives who will be in the most danger, having been the party in power during the past few years’ negotiations with the EU and the subsequent parliamentary wranglings. The British electorate are a perceptive bunch; they can see through the blatant attempts to force through a Withdrawal Agreement that many voices have argued could actually be worse than continuing membership of the European Union. They have noted the sharp contrast between what the electorate asked for back in 2016 and the deal as laid before the House last week – practically nobody is impressed.

The Speaker may have blocked the Government’s attempt to table a third vote on the Prime Minister’s Withdrawal Agreement for now, but I would not take it as a given at this point that the matter has been fully and finally laid to rest. With that said, there is also a great fatigue among the nation’s voters when it comes to Brexit. Most seem to want us to ‘just get on with it’, and some among those are willing to hold their noses and put up with this Withdrawal Agreement if it gets us out of the EU for now – perhaps those doorstep conversations will be slightly easier!

Others remain more strident, demanding a full and complete exit – a ‘clean break’, if you will – at the end of this month, as we were promised over 100 times. While some have labelled this position ‘extreme’, when one actually stands back and considers the great lengths this Government had previously gone to in repeatedly emphasising the date of our departure, perhaps it is not.

For myself, as for many others, the Prime Minister’s deal had begun to look increasingly tempting, as the prospect of ‘no Brexit’ has loomed ever larger by the day – a Sword of Damocles held poised above the fragile hopes of a nation that expressed greater support for leaving the EU than for any Government it has ever had. In that original anecdote hailing from Ancient Greece, the name of the sword is actually somewhat of a misnomer, rather in the manner of the ‘Trojan’ horse (which, as one recalls, was arguably more of a Greek horse).

King Dionysius offers to switch places with Damocles, one of his courtiers, who had expressed admiration for luxuries of the King’s lifestyle, for a single day. However, he arranges for a large sword to be hung above the throne, held in place by a single hair of a horse’s tail, to symbolise the great burden that comes with leadership, and just how quickly – and brutally – it can be ended. In the end, Damocles is unable to stand the pressure and begs Dionysius’ leave to return to his former role early.

While on the face of it this might seem an apt analogy for the position our Prime Minister finds herself in, I find it even more fitting to describe the sorry state of affairs now presented to those who voted with passion to leave the European Union. There are many luxuries to be had in the great prize of returning our full sovereignty to these islands and shucking off the EU’s vice-like grip at one stroke. But alas, a ruler intent on coercing the people into believing that these indulgences may not be worth having has deliberately put a terrible prospect in place – the threat of ‘no Brexit’ – in an attempt to convince them to walk away from it voluntarily. The question for Brexiteers now is whether they can muster greater conviction than Damocles.

The main reason why I believe that we must is, in fact, very simple – it is revealed in the tactics that the European Union has deployed to deal with a Member State wishing to depart. The tactic that worked so well in getting Britain to this point with the current Withdrawal Agreement (albeit with the complicity of so many on this side of the Channel) was to agree the framework for departure prior to the future relationship, while – critically – having a set deadline in place for these negotiations.

At the end of that deadline loomed the prospect of an outcome that ‘nobody wanted’ – a no-deal Brexit. It was child’s play for the EU to continually refuse Britain’s proposals, while making its own that it knew we would find unpalatable (such as a comprehensive Free Trade Agreement that we refused because, by its very nature, it was inherently designed to exclude Northern Ireland). All the while, the clock was running down until we had no choice but to compromise on our own former red lines. By all accounts, this tactic was extremely successful.

So, then, the biggest issue I take with the format of the Prime Minister’s Withdrawal Agreement is that we will see the exact same tactic deployed against us once more – and, just as before, we will have agreed to it in advance. There will be a set deadline for the future relationship negotiations – although this time 21 months rather than 24 – and at the end of it will be an outcome that ‘nobody wants’: the backstop.

Given the ongoing connivance of some on this side of the water, who would do all they could to subvert the negotiating process and tilt the balance in the EU’s favour, I see no reason whatsoever why a tactic that worked so well before would fail to do so again. Any future relationship we would end up negotiating under these terms – with which we could then be stuck for the long haul – is highly likely to be unfavourable to us, vis à vis the leverage we could have deployed with a far more fairly-stacked deck. This, for me – above all other concerns – is something that we cannot and should not risk.

I therefore believe, along with many others, that now is the time for Brexiteers in the House of Commons to hold the line and firmly reject any further attempts to hold Brexit to ransom. There are, as some have said, ‘no good options’ in respect of how MPs should vote now – but such is life oftentimes. The spirit of the Leave vote has been, to my mind at least, largely about demonstrating that the people are ultimately sovereign. To allow our rulers – be they far-flung or indeed home-grown – to go about this great affair in a manner that runs contrary to that principle is truly when that spirit dies. We must not let it.

This is what I will be telling the electorate in my ward on the doorsteps, should they ask. I would encourage our current parliamentarians to imagine the conversations they will be having, should they choose to thwart the will of the people – be it this week or at any time in the future. Just as in the tale of Damocles, it would seem that their future, and the future of any functioning democracy in this country, now hangs by a single hair of a horse’s tail.

]]>The questions with which Tory Brexiteers are grappling right nowhttps://brexitcentral.com/questions-tory-brexiteers-grappling-right-now/
Mon, 18 Mar 2019 08:43:38 +0000http://brexitcentral.com/?p=11024It’s the beginning of another critical week that will likely define whether Brexit happens at the end of next week (as it currently should, on the basis of the law of the land) or if there will be a delay for some as yet unspecified reason and for an as yet unknown period. I know […]

]]>It’s the beginning of another critical week that will likely define whether Brexit happens at the end of next week (as it currently should, on the basis of the law of the land) or if there will be a delay for some as yet unspecified reason and for an as yet unknown period.

I know many of those Conservative MPs who opposed the Theresa May’s deal last week have spent the weekend agonising how to vote if and when it is brought back to the Commons, subject to pressure from a variety of sources giving them distinctly different advice.

On the one hand, they are told by some that blocking a deal that would see the UK formally leaving the EU in a matter of weeks would provoke a backlash from voters who want Brexit delivered. Moreover, they are told that they risk no Brexit at all since it would likely lead to a long extension to the Article 50 period during which anything could happen. Indeed, they are reminded that campaigning most vociferously for the deal to be voted down right now are the so-called People’s Vote campaign, sensing it as their best opportunity to reverse Brexit altogether.

On the other hand, they are advised by others that if they back the deal, there will be a public backlash some months down the line once it becomes clear to voters the constraints which it places on the British Government over the coming years. In other words, that what was a bad deal last week remains a bad deal this week. Martin Howe QC puts this case on BrexitCentralthis morning.

Much hinges on whether the Government would put to Parliament in a week’s time an Article 50 extension under whatever terms might be offered by the European Council at the end of this week – and whether it would be passed.

Theresa May promised the Commons last Tuesday:

“If the House votes for an extension [which it did in principle on Thursday], the Government will seek to agree that extension with the EU and bring forward the necessary legislation to change the exit date, commensurate with that extension.”

Those inside the Government lament that despite Thursday’s motion not technically being legally binding, this promise at the Despatch Box effectively gives the Prime Minister no choice but to proceed with such an extension. But what if the terms offered are so punitive or outrageous as to clearly be against the UK’s interests – not to mention in breach of oft-repeated manifesto commitments? Is it conceivable that she would stand up to Brussels and refuse to go ahead on those terms? But then even if the Government relented, would the Remain-dominated Commons not find a way of forcing the Government’s hand in some way?

That said, any legislative move to extend Article 50 would be taking place just a few days before the legal exit day. Would there be sufficient time to get it through Parliament? And if the terms of any extension were indeed punitive or unreasonable, could the Commons yet vote against it, prompting the default of an exit on WTO terms on 29th March?

So many questions… Yet what is clear to me is that it is the antics of those recalcitrant Remainers inside Parliament – and indeed inside the Government – who openly campaigned against a no-deal Brexit and voted accordingly in the Commons last week which have undermined the UK’s negotiating stance to the point that none of the remaining options which the Government says is left available would be acceptable to the majority in the country who voted for Brexit. All in all, a thoroughly sub-optimal situation.